Whelp, looks like my invitation-only PBP fizzled out due to RL busy schedules, so I'm open to starting a new PBP game for people interested in playing KIRTHFINDER (not my name for it, BTW), but who haven't had the opportunity.
I'm open to suggestions for types of adventures and settings.
I think you can see from my own recruitment I find this system absolutely fascinating -- I've only DM'd in the past, but I'll throw my hat in the ring to make a Bard Minstrel building towards the Paladin Prestige Class -- e.g., the 'Knight Troubadour' option -- if that's possible.
I'm open on settings, but I'd love to try something very high medieval like Mystara, a (semi) historical War of the Roses/Arthurian Earth, Greyhawk, or something else where a romantic court minstrel could fit in.
I'll keep my ear to the ground on this, though I won't toss out character ideas until I have a little more on settings... Admittedly I don't know a ton about different settings, but I'm usually the type for highly magical settings
I'd also be down for the Midgard setting from Kobold Press, it's very high fantasy/traditional fantasy etc.
-- if that's possible.
Of course it is!
How are you selecting players, and how many are you selecting?
Also, my other idea for a character would be an assassin -- what would you suggest for something like an umbral stalker/stygian archetyped slayer slayer equivalent? I would want to be Lawful Evil, is that acceptable, or are you restricting this to only good and neutral aligned characters?
Four or five players, selected by inscrutable whim (or more likely by who replies first). Straight rogue with the right skill tricks and feats will probably get you what you want, class-wise. Per the Intro chapter, you don't have an actual "alignment" unless you're an outsider embodying some ethos, so that's no sweat.
If we're going for that "Feudal kingdoms and Courts" type adventure, then I think that a I'd go with the whole Gallant Knight archetype... Though I also wouldn't want to step on the bard's toes by being a second charismatic character, though generally very personable persuasive people tends to be what I like to play most (And is also why I am so ecstatic that Charisma got a new job in KF).
Those rules look curious, going to check them out.
As for type of adventure, maybe freeform organization building combined with a few old and extensive standing problems to serve as long term campaign goals?
If we're going for that "Feudal kingdoms and Courts" type adventure, then I think that a I'd go with the whole Gallant Knight archetype... Though I also wouldn't want to step on the bard's toes by being a second charismatic character, though generally very personable persuasive people tends to be what I like to play most (And is also why I am so ecstatic that Charisma got a new job in KF).
I'll probably do the assassin idea then -- I might actually prefer that since I don't really like having to deal with spells, and bards are still casters.
I'm imagining something like Edward from the Anita Blake series -- a very honorable sociopath.
I confess that I could do without vancian casting myself (mostly because I blame it for being the reason that casters were MASSIVELY better than warriors).
Also I ended up getting another idea for a potential campaign/setting though it somewhat goes against the grain of what we've been talking about so far.
A group of people have been brought together for reasons they do not understand. However over time they realize that they all have a distant blood relation to a Diety of their pantheon, and that things are going very wrong
I confess that I could do without vancian casting myself (mostly because I blame it for being the reason that casters were MASSIVELY better than warriors).
I think you'll find we've managed to largely address that disparity, despite the fact that one of the original players indicated that abandoning Vancian casting was a deal-breaker.
I'm imagining something like Edward from the Anita Blake series -- a very honorable sociopath.
Sorry, vampire romance never appealed to me as a genre, so the reference is lost on me.
I have been dying to play a Kirthfinder game recently. There's still so much about the system that I want to try out in a real game.
Regarding level: KF is complicated, with a lot of moving parts. If we have mostly people who are new to it, I'm recommending we start at 1st level. If a lot of the players have played it before and want to see how it plays at mid-level, I'm open to that, too.
Here's your chance, Kaouse!
I'm still fairly new to Play By Post (mainly a Roll20 guy myself), but I'm more than willing to give this a shot.
I'm actually strongly considering the possibility of playing a "Muscle Wizard" or a "Martial Sorcerer," if I'm being honest.
I know that KF fixed that disparity. I just kinda mention it because it's still something I know to be true with normal PF and D&D
I'm okay with starting at 1st, but I would hope we could move the first 3-4 levels along sort of quickly to really come into our builds before too long.
I'm also looking at the rogue/monk option to get the ninjistu tricks/be a kind of ninja, but generally a lot of these nifty synergy options require levels in more than one class.
Here's a question that might or might not have been asked previously.
What happens when a Sorcerer chooses the Domain option in place of a bloodline, and specifically, what happens if they chooses the Mystic Domain?
Would they gain access to the cleric spell list if they chose Option B, where their arcane and divine levels apply strong theurgy to each other?
Obviously, they wouldn't gain an increase in their arcane spellcasting, but as written, wouldn't this basically grant them access to the cleric spell list at only slightly reduced progression?
There is a note that the maximum level of arcane spells the Mystic Domain cleric can use is equal to their arcane spellcaster level, however, there does not appear to be such a thing in the reverse case for divine spellcaster levels.
Though, does this even do anything before they gain the level 8 ability that allows them to dedicate some of their spells known slots into prepared spell slots?
Lastly, does Option A allow for a cleric/archivist to gain access to wizard/sorcerer spellcasting without actually needing wizard levels?
I'm not greatly familiar with he kirthfinder rules just yet, but looking through them they address a lot of the things I dislike about pathfinder and 3.0/3.5 in general. I'd be very interested in joining if there's still room.
If someone decides, in the very last moment, that they're not going to play this, I might build something to fill the gap. That would give me an idea of how KF works, and having ideas of how things work is always a good thing.
The Introduction should be on the very first page you link too, instead of in the 'Skills, Feats, etc' folder. Considering the fact that it covers the sweeping changes of these house rules - which are pretty damn significant - it needs to be what you read from the start.
Concerning my previous question about class synergy, I guess a more general question would be, do abilities which grant class synergy/theurgy require you to actually have a level in said class in order to gain their benefits?
Here's a question that might or might not have been asked previously.
What happens when a Sorcerer chooses the Domain option in place of a bloodline, and specifically, what happens if they chooses the Mystic Domain?
(a) Would they gain access to the cleric spell list if they chose Option B, where their arcane and divine levels apply strong theurgy to each other?
(b) Obviously, they wouldn't gain an increase in their arcane spellcasting, but as written, wouldn't this basically grant them access to the cleric spell list at only slightly reduced progression?
(c) Though, does this even do anything before they gain the level 8 ability that allows them to dedicate some of their spells known slots into prepared spell slots?
(d) Lastly, does Option A allow for a cleric/archivist to gain access to wizard/sorcerer spellcasting without actually needing wizard levels?
(a) You have no divine levels unless you're a multiclassed cleric/sorcerer, archivist/sorcerer, or incarnate/sorcerer.
(b) If single-classed, you'd only advance arcane casting, and replace bonus spells with domain ones. Since you have no divine caster levels, you have no other divine casting.
(c) Not much, as you can see.
(d) Option A specifically calls out how muticlass arcane and divine class levels interact with each other. No arcane class levels = Option A does next to nothing.
Concerning my previous question about class synergy, I guess a more general question would be, do abilities which grant class synergy/theurgy require you to actually have a level in said class in order to gain their benefits?
Bingo!
If that's the case, then I think I want to try out an Archivist who starts off with the Magic (+ Knowledge) Domain. I don't really play a lot of 9th level spellcasters, but I think this should be quite fun.
That said, I vastly prefer spontaneous casting to prepared casting. I don't suppose that there's a way for prepared spellcasters to become spontaneous spellcasters without multiclassing or something? Even if there isn't, I'll still stick with playing Archivist over Sorcerer/Incarnate.
Are we getting any closer to a prospective setting? I feel like that will have a big impact on our character concepts.
Can I take Serenity to make Channel Energy run off of my Wisdom stat, instead of my Charisma stat?
Hm. I admit I tend to apply due to the feel / world of a campaign ... but I am a huge fan of Lord of Light ...
I too would be potentially interested in this!
Initially thinking a rogue, but I see Seb has their sites set on that, so I'll see what else strikes my interested.
Like Seb said above, setting will help go along way to figuring out the right concept.
Hm. I admit I tend to apply due to the feel / world of a campaign ... but I am a huge fan of Lord of Light ...
I had to use my wikifu to look that up -- that's an interesting idea, and it gets at my issue about setting -- a ninja (rogue/monk) would work in this setting, but not in others.
And honestly no one should take me into account for selecting character concepts -- I'm still undecided and I also may well decide I don't have enough time to play in something and run my games. I'm generally happier behind the table, this was just the first idea that was sufficiently intriguing that I Might want to play.
A rogue/monk 'ninja' works in any setting -- in /every/ setting -- because the ninja is, at its heart, an assassin and spy. So ...
Okay, I think I've settled on playing Eshkival, the Archivist. I just need to know what the starting point buy is going to be, and I can start making a character. Even though I'm planning to get Serenity to apply towards Channel Energy, I'm still planning on having a positive Charisma score to qualify for a number of feats.
Can I take Serenity to make Channel Energy run off of my Wisdom stat, instead of my Charisma stat?
As written, you'd need to be a paladin, but I don't mind waiving that requirement.
Okay, I think I've settled on playing Eshkival, the Archivist. I just need to know what the starting point buy is going to be, and I can start making a character. Even though I'm planning to get Serenity to apply towards Channel Energy, I'm still planning on having a positive Charisma score to qualify for a number of feats.
It's spelled out in Chapter 1. No point buy. 4d6 (drop lowest) six times, and arrange those 6 scores among your stats as you see fit. If you prefer, after rolling you can ditch all the results and take the Elite array instead (15, 14, 13, 12, 10, 8).
I don't suppose that there's a way for prepared spellcasters to become spontaneous spellcasters without multiclassing or something?
Way ahead of you:
Spontaneous Casting: At 1st level, you may choose to cast spontaneously (like a sorcerer) instead of preparing your spells, with the referee's permission. Once made, this choice cannot be changed.
Are we getting any closer to a prospective setting? I feel like that will have a big impact on our character concepts.
A word of caution: "types of settings" =/= specific settings. I usually try to avoid pre-printed ones, so let's shun Golarion or FR or KP "Midgard" or whatever. My preference is usually to develop the setting while we play, so that I can take everyone's input into account.
Outside of that, tell me what you guys want, and I'll try to make it happen unless (a) it's incompatible with the rules (e.g., anything "historical"), or (b) it rubs one of my pet peeves the wrong way (e.g., I dislike furries and vampire romance). I've run swashbuckling campaigns; "taming the wilderness;" all-human cold-war magical espionage; buddy action flick-style stuff; Amber-style universes; etc., etc.
So far, we have
IN: Sebecloki, Kaouse
MAYBE: Warriorking9001, baggageboy, Jereru, Monkeygod
IDLY CURIOUS or MERELY COMMENTING: Tavarokk, Wormouroboros
NOT INTERESTED BUT HAS STRONG OPTIONS ANYWAY: Fury of the Tempest
For the "In" people: Let's start rolling up characters.
For the "Maybe" people: stat up a sample character and win a spot!
Ah, uff... I'm not much keen on rolling, but let's see...
Meh. I'll have a look and tell you.
I know I'm coming into the discussion a tad behind, but can I still toss my name in to join? I'm flexible to fill in character type for the party if needed.
Slight caveat, although I have played d&d since high schoool, this would be my first PBP game but as long as you don't mind that, I really want to play.
Let me know if a spot is still open and you're willing to let a digital noobie along.
For the "Maybe" people: stat up a sample character and win a spot!
I'm still a bit unsure of the setting, and feel like I would need a bit of an understanding of that before I locked in my answer, but to throw out a few ideas to fill in a number of different roles.
1: a Destined Bloodline Battle Sorcerer (or a Fighter/Incarnate Cross): I note two somewhat different builds for the same thing because of the concept that I want to play something that has some kind of cosmic significance... In hindsight that sounds way more arrogant than I intended, but it's mostly the idea of the folk-hero farm boy that realized his destiny is out there somewhere, and he needs to figure out what it is before it's too late. Whether that means he finds himself with a spark of divinity or arcane destiny, the point still remains. Can play this frontline or more support as well by leaving the idea open.
2: The "Courtly Knight": I had mentioned that if we were in that war of the roses type feudal court setting that I think the proper "Knight in Shining Armor" concept intrigued me, but I do not actually know yet if we are going with that (and I don't want to step on the bard's toes by going charisma, which both of these ideas would rely on). Primarily Frontline
3: The Newbie Wizard: Playing a wizard that is fresh out of wizard, school. someone who is smart but inexperienced in the ways of the world because they've spend the past decade or so cooped up in wizard college, and so every experience is brand new to them. I guess that playing a 'nerd' inside of an rpg is kinda silly, but I think it could be amusing if nothing else.
4: The Alchemist: The way I can think of to fill in the utility rogue role without stepping on the other rogue's toes, taking some casting and such in order to act as a supporting member that also has enough of a combat bite to help out in a dungeon delve. Support/utility and flanker.
I know I'm coming into the discussion a tad behind, but can I still toss my name in to join?
Sure, stat a character and maybe win a spot!
Meh. I'll have a look and tell you.
That isn't "meh." That's better than the elite array. And given the number of ways to boost stats (esp. physical ones), I don't think you'll be disappointed in play.
One of the things KF tries to do is keep you viable even if you don't start off game play as a Prince of Amber. Straight 18s are not necessary; it's just a matter of adjusting expectations.
I'm still a bit unsure of the setting, and feel like I would need a bit of an understanding of that before I locked in my answer
Setting update:
Unless a few people have very strong opinions that all happen to coincide, I'm going to assume we'll be developing a homebrew setting that will most likely allow whatever character concepts you're wanting to try.
I don't want to step on the bard's toes by going charisma, which both of these ideas would rely on).
I wouldn't worry too much there. One of the design goals for KF was to balance the stats a bit, so the "One PC has great Cha and everyone else tanks it" expectation is subverted. Cha is really valuable for everyone.
In KF, the bard's main schtick isn't Cha (that isn't even the Skald's primary stat); it's breaking the action economy.
Couple of questions:
1) Standard Races(+ simple half-breeds) ?
2) Did we settle on a starting level? While I'm totally new to Kirthfinder, I am not even sorta new to D&D/PF, so I feel like I could probably do alright if we started any where between 1-3(maybe 4). Definitely not looking to start too high, as there's still a lot I don't know.
3) How do you feel about using the Kirthfinder setting? (not sure if it has an official name)
I'm considering a skill focused Rogue, looking to start(or take over) some sort of criminal organization. Won't be 'evil' but won't be 'Good' either. More like 'dark'.
5) Are we allowed to use the secondary attributes?
I... have no idea how to make rolls on this forum.